|
It isn't hard to hijack a revolution and Russia's intelligence agencies are quite capable. "Extremist" elements in revolutions were generally already present before the revolution and use the opportunity of a the liminality of the state to insert themselves in leadership. What, if any, extremist elements existed in Ukraine before the November protests? If there were any, were they religiously based (Such as militant Islamists), politically based (such as far-right militias) or...? Also, if anyone would be willing to translate the video linked a few posts up (here) I'd love to hear the highlights. It seems like an interview with some random soldier, but it has over two million views.
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 04:51 |
|
|
jimma posted:The spin that is being put on this by your sources is amusing; it's kind of, "See? Rabble and extremists are in charge! They want to be the dictators of Ukraine!" No less 'amusing' than the spin put on by the western media about the situation. I was particularly amused by an op-ed on Forbes, where the author literally said in the comments, when presented with evidence contrary to his argument, that he doesn't care about what they say, his sources are right, end of discussion. Here, its on page 5 of the comments: http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2014/03/04/5-important-facts-that-the-western-press-is-getting-terribly-wrong-in-ukraine/
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Red Crown posted:Also, if anyone would be willing to translate the video linked a few posts up (here) I'd love to hear the highlights. It seems like an interview with some random soldier, but it has over two million views. The soldier said he's Russian, and they are there to protect the local population from terrorist activities. The interviewer requested him to specify on what basis they are there, which terrorist activity are they anticipating. The guys was obviously not willing to do that, so the interviewers kept at it, saying its the law, he has to tell them, and that they are allowed to film them according to the law. The soldier also avoided the question about the uniform (it's not marked), saying that's just how it is. Then the old Ukrainian guy shows up. He tells the interviewers to leave the guy alone, that they are here to protect them from the 'fascists', he uses the word 'zapadenchina' which as far as I know is a Ukrainian slang for the western Ukrainians. The rest of the exchange is just the standard back and forth, with interviewers asking the old guy if he knows who the fascists are, the old guy saying that Kiev is a mess while Crimea is doing just great, the press are all bad except for what they show in Russia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
Mightypeon posted:Concerning dealing directly with Oligarchs, it is very very important to note the huge difference between Ukraine and Russia, in Russia, the Oligarchs are powerfull but under the state, in Ukraine, Oligarchs decide who is the state. Thats also a material difference for the respective People. Salaries and life expectancy rose considerably under Putin, Ukraine is still as hosed up as it was during Yeltsins time. This is really interesting, I've been hearing about the oligarch system in Ukraine to be as such (i.e. they run the show, the president is a puppet), but never seen any decent articles or videos covering this. Any suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
The Capitulator posted:The soldier said he's Russian, and they are there to protect the local population from terrorist activities. The interviewer requested him to specify on what basis they are there, which terrorist activity are they anticipating. The guys was obviously not willing to do that, so the interviewers kept at it, saying its the law, he has to tell them, and that they are allowed to film them according to the law. The soldier also avoided the question about the uniform (it's not marked), saying that's just how it is. Does "Zapadenchina" have a particularly negative connotation? The spread of language like that is an early indicator of a trend towards civil war. The Capitulator posted:This is really interesting, I've been hearing about the oligarch system in Ukraine to be as such (i.e. they run the show, the president is a puppet), but never seen any decent articles or videos covering this. Any suggestions? My understanding is that that Yanukovych was very much in charge of the government. He received widespread support from the oligarchy because he ensured the government served their interests directly. Prior to his fall, he had begun to ask more and more in return from the oligarchs, which contributed to his downfall.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Government of Ukrain is located in Kiev. Only people in Kiev will can organize The New goverment anew? utjkju fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Mar 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
Red Crown posted:Does "Zapadenchina" have a particularly negative connotation? The spread of language like that is an early indicator of a trend towards civil war. Its pretty complex actually, but a chief difference between Yanuk and gass Princes Timoshenko was that Yanuk does not exactly have a "industry" to his own Name while Timoschenko does/did. In one sentence, Yanukovich is a corrupt politician that wants to become an Oligarch, while Timoschenko is an Oligarch that also wants to be a corrupt politician (This is a simplification). The Oligarchs basically wanted to avoid a Putin like figure in Ukraine (which is why the strained hard to Keep the army/Intel Services out of real political power), Yanuk was a more "pro eastern" candidate partially Chosen because he didnt have his own "industrial base", which meant that he was comparativly weaker than Timoschenko. Since Yanuk was pretty far from attaining critical mass (and thus be able to Pull a Putin on the Oligarchs), he was, to the oligarchs, vastly preferable for time being. Later, a couple of things changed. First, Yanuk channeled bribe Money/"contributions" into his own pockets, or his sons pockets. There was also some more midlevel "you are corrupt, Yanukovich now seizes your corrupt assets" stuff. This meant that Yanukovich now had an "economic base", which of course removed the Thing Oligarchs liked about him. There was also the fact that Putin made his displeasure with Yanuk known under some sidechannels. Basically, in Russia, pocketing 20% is acceptable, pocketing 40% gets the FSB on your arse, Yanukovich would have pocketed triple Digit percentages if that was mathematically possible (sometimes it actually is possible). What kept Yanuk in power was partly the Division of Ukraine. The East Needs Russia to keeps its living Standards, and the western "Revoluzzers" actively try to degrade Relations with Russia (they already did so after the first orange Revolution). The east-west schism also caused some lower Level Oligarch (termed the "National beourgoisie", as opposed to West Ukraines "Off-Shore aristocracy", in an interesting sidenote, if you look at the Money flows, West Ukraines Off Shore aristocracy is closer to Russias Off Shore aristocrats than they are to the East Ukrainian National Bourgoisie) to actually reinvest in East Ukraine (but only in the area they had some control over, investing in Kiev/Lviv is just way to risky). This caused some economic growth in some of East Ukraines regions (but not so much in its far east), it also means that Yanuk could extract more bribes from this regions. Oh, one Thing should not be forgotten: A big reason for all Ukrainians for not "becoming a part of Russia" is that a gouverment in Kiev is more easily overthrown by an uprising than a gouverment in Moscow is (This may not be the case after joining the EU). This is known in the eastern Ukraine too, and this knowledge is more intense following Russian movments into Crimea, however, if the West establishes a precedent of "gently caress you East Ukraine, only we West Ukrainians can overthrow the gouverment, you cant!" there will be considerable associated costs. Considering Solutions: The Problem with the best solution, federalisation and finlandisation (This worked very well for Finland), is that Russia proposed it which makes it automatically unacceptable for the "Evil Putler" crowd.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Red Crown posted:Does "Zapadenchina" have a particularly negative connotation? The spread of language like that is an early indicator of a trend towards civil war. I would say it is negative in the context, though normally it would be like a southern Englishman saying 'northern monkeys'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
Mightypeon posted:(...) This is very interesting -- can you expand on what "Finlandization" means in this context? What exactly has Russia proposed that would fall under that heading?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Finlandisation as "proposed" by Russia (they floated a number of such proposals around for a decade, what they would offer right now "depends") would have 2 components: 1: Foreign policy -Not joining either Nato nor entering a Military alliance with Russia --But accepting Russias base in Sevastotpol, which strictly speaking means that Ukraine wouldnt be completely neutral -Entering any Economic Union is fair game, it may be possible for an individual Region to enter economic unions, Independent of other Ukrainian regions 2: Internal policy: -A considerable amount of decentralisation, right now, Ukraine is very centralized, and f.e. Yanukovich could Appoint gouvernours (which could just be someone who paid him much Money) to Lviv (which hates Yanuk), and right now, Maidan is appointing incredibly unpopular Oligarchs as direct gouvernours of eastern regions. Making the central gouverment less powerfull would also reduce the stakes during power struggles, which should move things towards more peacefull directions. Under various proposals floated around by Russia in the last 10 years or so, authority would be far more decentralized with regions having elections for their own gouverneours. -Some Russian proposals went farther, and extend the right to conduct treaties with other nations to regions. In theory, Crimea could join a Russian treaty, and Lviv could for most purposes join Nato. Obviously, Russia would absolutly love/prefer negotiating with pro Russia Crimea Region over Russian basing rights, compared to negotiating with not so pro Russian Kiev. Maidan Propaganda is very strongly against decentralisation, since they now have the central gouverment they want to use its powers to its fullest, even though decentralisation is propably the only way to reduce corruption on a meaningfull Level. If you can buy a gouverneorship, corruption is guaranteed to happen (you can definitly ask me about the reasons why Putin first went to Appoint gouverneors, than appointed gouvernours accepted by the local parliaments, and now has the gouverneours being Chosen in local elections, its pretty fascinating and reveals very exactly how scared Putin was of Oligarchs/local Lords at different times of his career), while a corrupt elected gouverneor could be forced out by his own electorate, without said electorate having to set Kiev on fire/call for a Russian Military intervention.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Do it violate voting power (right to vote) of people from other parts of Ukrain, when the New government in Kiev was(or will be) organized?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
utjkju posted:Do it violate voting power (right to vote) of people from other parts of Ukrain, when the New government in Kiev was(or will be) organized? The new government at least claims that it is only temporary until Ukraine-wide elections can be held again. Of course that hasn't happened yet, but one can argue you can't have a free vote with a gun to your head - that can be interpreted different ways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
utjkju posted:Do it violate voting power (right to vote) of people from other parts of Ukrain, when the New government in Kiev was(or will be) organized? That would depend on whether there are going to be new parliamentary elections within a reasonable time frame, which would be the polite and customary thing to do after a revolution. There are certain barriers to doing this anytime soon, though, such as the fact that part of the country is under military occupation by, and is about to be absorbed by, Russia. And even after that occurs, it seems unlikely that an election would result in a government that both Western and Eastern Ukrainians would find acceptable. For that to happen, both halves of the country would have to trust each other enough to be willing to share power, and sadly, it doesn't seem like that's where things are headed at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
Is The New government in Kiev legal, if most people can not vote?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
Been out of it for a while on personal business. I have also been talking to friends in Russia (typically Russians who have never left the country) who feed into everything they are told. Its a little frustrating to talk to people without critical thinking capabilities. There is a website set up to counter the massive wave of propaganda coming from the Russian media. http://fakecontrol.org/ This website dispels a lot of myths about what they're being told in Russia. Because while around 30% of people in Crimea want to join Russia (which is a large amount) there are even more opposed. Namely the Tatars and ethnic Ukrainians there, of where there are large amounts. This is a super complicated issue that needed to be dealt with politically instead of militarily and this is only going to hurt Russia/Putin in the long run. Another thing worth reading for you guys is a letter in the style of "A Modest Proposal" http://nest-expressed.com/open-letter-to-putin-from-a-concerned-ukrainian/ I know most of you wont change your minds, even when presented with evidence, but please, don't get your information from a single source and don't believe everything you hear. This also applies to media outlets from outside the Russian speaking world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 10:11
|
|
|
utjkju posted:Is The New government in Kiev legal, if most people can not vote? All revolutions are illegal. Does that mean they are all illegitimate?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
Welcome back, Tankus!Tankus posted:Because while around 30% of people in Crimea want to join Russia (which is a large amount) there are even more opposed. Namely the Tatars and ethnic Ukrainians there, of where there are large amounts. I suspect that the outcome of the upcoming referendum in Crimea is predetermined ... and that Russia and the ethnic-Russian Crimeans (and a few people in this thread) will consider it to have been free, fair, and legitimate. Meanwhile, do you have any insight into what might happen in Eastern Ukraine? Will they follow Crimea's lead, or seek autonomy, or decide to remain in Ukraine and share power in Kiev? Interestingly, one unintended consequence of the upcoming Crimean secession is that Ukraine's ethnic-Russian population will drop by about a million people, which means (I presume) that Eastern Ukraine's political position within any Ukrainian national government will be weakened.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
jimma posted:All revolutions are illegal. Does that mean they are all illegitimate? Regarding modern society it depends whether the international community either accepts you or not. You can protest, fight and die for something you think it's necessary, it doesn't matter as long the other governments don't accept you in any way. Leads to the problem that if one government says "Yeah, cool, okay" and another one "Nah, no, don't" no one really wants to speak with you. Regarding this, a revolution indeed can be virtually illegitimate. I think that's gonna be a problem in the Ukraine later, no matter if Russia finally claims the Crimea or not. What will Russia do? Accepting the new Kiew government or will they try to destabilize it even further?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
Seriously, I think that Putin is basically trying to go trough the least bad path. Perhaps ist also a "Trial baloon", East Ukraine is somewhat pro-Russian to neutral, but would have enough of a plurality to make a Guerilla fight possible. I think Putins current plan is to wait for mistakes of the other side, particular for a clash between the politicians/the west and the extremists. Alternativly, he may be betting on Timeschenko and eventually strike a deal with her. Russians wanted to see him "do something" and he did. "Loosing Ukraine to Nato" is pretty much like "loosing Canada to the warsaw pact" would be for the USA.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
Tankus posted:
Great site Tankus, I read several entries and the guys are doing a great job in keeping things factual without the propaganda flavor you get in the usual anti-Russian sources (i.e. BBC and company). I don't know if the English version is working or not, I tried it but it gave me an error, so not sure on the quality of the English material. Highly recommended for everyone on both sides of the conflict.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
jimma posted:Welcome back, Tankus! The plan is to vote on the 16th to see the direction of things. I have tatar friends in the Crimea and they're really fearful of losing everything they have their whole lives for. After the deportations/purges under Stalin, the area has seen a rebounding of tatars, its actually the only ethnic group that is growing in strength. Its totally under represented in the press and they wont take this lying down. One of my good friends posted this as a status: It is so sad seeing my parents packing documents and getting ready to leave if they have to. My dad says: "Photograph everything in the house, someday you can claim that it was ours" Im a bit behind in terms of the news, i have a lot to catch up on, but some of the things posted in this thread are disheartening. On a positive note, today was the 200th birthday of Ukraine's Shakespeare, Taras Shevchenko. The weather and atmosphere in Kiev was really great. Music, poetry and traditional dresses in the streets of Kiev is really refreshing. I suggest you guys check out his wiki and some of his work, he's probably the most revered Ukrainian in history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taras_Shevchenko Tankus fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Mar 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
God drat, that's heartbreaking. Good luck dude.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Tankus posted:The plan is to vote on the 16th to see the direction of things. I have tatar friends in the Crimea and they're really fearful of losing everything they have their whole lives for. After the deportations/purges under Stalin, the area has seen a rebounding of tatars, its actually the only ethnic group that is growing in strength. Its totally under represented in the press and they wont take this lying down. One of my good friends posted this as a status: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=256py8v6ZW4 - Here Tatars from Crimea told them opinion. Do you think that they say lies? utjkju fucked around with this message at 04:09 on Mar 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 03:41
|
|
|
utjkju posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=256py8v6ZW4 - Here Tatars from Crimea told them opinion. Do you think that they say lies? Translation: Speaker: We are old enough to remember the first Orange Revolution, how they came to power, how those that are now behind the Maidan came to power. Not through elections, through trickery. They spent their 4-5 years in power, did nothing and left. Now they vie for power again, and they don't have another way to do it. With the same Maidan tactics, even worse now, with shooting, with firebombing, they come again. They cannot win normal elections, how do you say it, democratically, they cannot do it. The technology that they have, that they use for power, it is unsatisfactory to me. They claim their system is better, but that is difficult to believe, since they spent 5 years in power and did nothing. What did they do? someone else: It's hard to believe. Speaker: You are all adults here. You lived when they were in power. I reminded you 100 times, buckwheat alone rose in price tenfold. I'm not talking about sugar and other food. They claim child care was cheap. Nothing was cheap. They can't do anything for us. As soon as something started boiling in this empty and perforated pot that they left the Ukraine, as soon as the people try to cook, as soon as something started out, they are at it again, so the people don't end up with anything. Those are the enemies of the people, right there. In any other country, they would be executed. In France, in Germany, these would be executed, regardless of all European values. In France, their heads would be chopped off, their guillotine is still up. someone else: America has the electric chair. Speaker: Yes! And they teach us how to live and how to be and what to do and what we can't do. Some teachers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
utjkju posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=256py8v6ZW4 - Here Tatars from Crimea told them opinion. Do you think that they say lies? The Orange revolution wasn't beneficial to almost anyone because it just replaced the people involved without a complete restructuring. Alternatively, I also didn't hear any praise and joy that the Russian liberators are there to save them. But I can totally see why they have little faith in the current revolution helping out. Its totally undecided as to where things are going now but hopefully stability can return and progress can be made. On a side note, buckwheat went up in price 10 fold? This must have been temporary since its only 60 cents a kilo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 10:10
|
|
|
Tankus posted:The Orange revolution wasn't beneficial to almost anyone because it just replaced the people involved without a complete restructuring. Alternatively, I also didn't hear any praise and joy that the Russian liberators are there to save them. But I can totally see why they have little faith in the current revolution helping out. Its totally undecided as to where things are going now but hopefully stability can return and progress can be made. Do you recognize the fact: there are people from Ukraina, who think that the New Government in Kiev is not legal, but these people can not vote?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 10:48
|
|
|
utjkju posted:Do you recognize the fact: there are people from Ukraina, who think that the New Government in Kiev is not legal, but these people can not vote? Its an interim-government, actual elections will be held at the end of May.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 11:00
|
|
|
Tankus posted:Its an interim-government, actual elections will be held at the end of May. But who chose the interim-government? And why people from Crimea, Sevastopol, Donetsk, Kharkov can not choose other interim-government, if they did not recognize the interim-government in Kiev? utjkju fucked around with this message at 12:01 on Mar 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
utjkju posted:But who chose the interim-government? And why people from Crimea, Sevastopol, Donetsk, Kharkov can not choose other interim-government, if they did not recognize the interim-government in Kiev? Ukraine chose the interim government, It is made up of legitimately elected parliamentary officials from all regions of Ukraine. When Yano fled Ukraine in a panic, a lot of his party did as well. The interim-government is far from what Ukraine needs, but it is the only legitimate ruling body the country has at the moment. All positions of power were filled by those (chosen from the ELECTED parliament) who pledged to step down once actual elections were held. Any other "government" in Ukraine is false and non representative of the people, even in western regions like Lviv.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:13
|
|
|
So as a Ukrainian how do you feel about the referendum of Crimea to join Russia? Also if Crimea does join Russia what sort of impact would that have on Ukraine?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:28
|
|
|
Tankus posted:Ukraine chose the interim government, It is made up of legitimately elected parliamentary officials from all regions of Ukraine. When Yano fled Ukraine in a panic, a lot of his party did as well. The interim-government is far from what Ukraine needs, but it is the only legitimate ruling body the country has at the moment. All positions of power were filled by those (chosen from the ELECTED parliament) who pledged to step down once actual elections were held. Any other "government" in Ukraine is false and non representative of the people, even in western regions like Lviv. What is Ukraine, which chose interim government? Crimea tatars, for example, did not choose interim government in Kiev. Crimea tatars is not Ukraina? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=256py8v6ZW4) And can you show laws, which say that Crimea tatars must not choose an interim government, and only "Ukraina" can choose an interim government?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:30
|
|
|
utjkju posted:What is Ukraine, which chose interim government? Can you show that Tartars are not allowed to vote in general elections? If the interim government is made up of elected politicians than it is indeed legitimate. There are elections in May, they can choose a new politician if they wish.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:37
|
|
|
Lord Windy posted:Can you show that Tartars are not allowed to vote in general elections? If the interim government is made up of elected politicians than it is indeed legitimate. There are elections in May, they can choose a new politician if they wish. But why Tartars can not choose interim government, and people from Kiev can choose interim government? Is It the democracy and equal rights or is it the discrimination of rights of Tatars?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:45
|
|
|
utjkju posted:What is Ukraine, which chose interim government? You are totally stuck on this dumb, legalistic argument. "No one voted for the interim government!" No poo poo: that's how a revolution works. As a practical matter, a post-revolutionary interim government can only be legitimized after the fact, not before. Have you ever heard of a revolution where the government was overthrown in the morning, and then an election for a new government was held in the afternoon?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:47
|
|
|
utjkju posted:But why Tartars can not choose interim government, and people from Kiev can choose interim government? Is It the democracy and equal rights or is it the discrimination of rights of Tatars? How is it discrimination? The government happens to be located in Kiev, so the politicians there formed it. These politicians likely came from all over Ukraine. If you mean why the current sitting president was ousted, than he got ousted because he annoyed enough people that they formed a massive protest he couldn't shift. I don't think people went and did it because they thought "Lets go gently caress with some Tatars"
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:51
|
|
|
Thrasophius posted:So as a Ukrainian how do you feel about the referendum of Crimea to join Russia? Also if Crimea does join Russia what sort of impact would that have on Ukraine? I'm not Ukrainian, just a supporter of sorts. Crimea joining Russia will be mutually harmful to both countries. Russia will inherit archaic industry in desperate need of revamping and a peninsula that is reliant on Ukraine for drat near everything: food, water, electricity, goods. So this means that Russia would have to provide this stuff, which it cant at least until better infrastructure is built. Crimea only has saving grace in terms of its economy and thats tourism. With Russia taking control and its bullshit and expensive visa policies that will hamper/kill tourism in the region. Also, who wants to go to sunny Russian occupied beaches when you can fly to Turkey for a cheaper vacation. Or go to Batumi which is trying so drat hard to be the next "go-to" place on The Black Sea. Reservations are down 90% in terms of what they were two years ago and people that are invested in this are getting nervous. Also Ukrainians own property, houses, and have family there, so this would impact their lives negatively. Ukrainians see this as Russia trying to make a land-grab in Ukraine and take landholdings. They think Russia wont stop at The Crimea (which it wont) and will try to reclaim the whole of Eastern Ukraine eventually. Over the weekend Russian troops, and make no mistake they are Russian, have seized another airport and mined the land connecting Crimea to Ukraine. However, these reports come from Ukrainian sources so I cant say with total confidence its true. The Ruble is taking a hit now over the situation and the Grivna is desperately trying to stabilize after weeks of loses. Losing the Crimea will do harm to both of these currencies. So, overall, this whole situation is loving both countries just because Russia cant bare the idea of losing "Little Russia" to the big bad "west". If the west really is so detrimental to CIS countries they should let Ukraine join NATO/EU whatever flounder and fail, so they could say "I told you so" and welcome a shamed Ukraine back into their loving arms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:52
|
|
|
Lord Windy posted:How is it discrimination? The government happens to be located in Kiev, so the politicians there formed it. These politicians likely came from all over Ukraine. If you mean why the current sitting president was ousted, than he got ousted because he annoyed enough people that they formed a massive protest he couldn't shift. Do you want to tell that people from Maidan is politicans? Maidan chose the interim government.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
utjkju posted:Do you want to tell that people from Maidan is politicans? Maidan chose the interim government. Well the Maidan are the protestors that ousted the previous government but they aren't the actual government. The actual government is made up of democratically elected politicians who are acting as caretakers until May when elections will be held. The politicians are likely the opposition, but this happens. In Australia the Governor General (our president) fired the government when it couldn't pass a budget and called an election. The opposition acted as a caretaker government until the election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
Lord Windy posted:Well the Maidan are the protestors that ousted the previous government but they aren't the actual government. The actual government is made up of democratically elected politicians who are acting as caretakers until May when elections will be held. Why other people, who is not Maidan, can not organize other government? Because they don't have military capacity?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 13:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 04:51 |
|
|
utjkju posted:Do you want to tell that people from Maidan is politicans? Maidan chose the interim government. This is not true. The interim government is a lot of the same members of parliament that were there before Yanukovich fled, it's not some wholly "new government" made up only by people from Kiev, nor is it made up of people from Maiden; even members of Yanukovich's own party voted him out of power after he fled. In fact some people in Maiden currently seem upset because they don't feel represented by the interim government. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 13:33 on Mar 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 13:30
|
|
